Audio By Vocalize
Contemporary scholarship converges on a central insight: journalism stands at a crossroads shaped by commercialisation, political hostility, digital disruption, and an empowered public sphere. Studies in digital journalism, media law, and democratic accountability show that while legacy media remain vital to constitutional governance, public trust is strained by perceptions of bias, sensationalism, and corporate capture.
Research on the Panama Papers demonstrates the enduring power of collaborative investigative journalism, and the flip-end analyses of Trump-era media conflict and post-January 6 coverage reveal how polarised ecosystems amplify claims of distortion and “flipped” narratives. Across this literature, a recurring recommendation emerges. It is a renewed commitment to legal literacy, ethical rigour, transparency, and public accountability as preconditions for legitimacy in what many describe as a post-truth or hyper-informed age.
Section 3 of the Media Council Act in Kenya articulates principles that are core to media practitioners; they are constitutional guardrails. Freedom of expression must reflect the interests of all sections of society, be accurate and fair, accountable and transparent, respectful of dignity and privacy, professional in conduct, and guided by national values under Article 10.
In an enlightened generation, armed with smartphones, digital archives, and real-time fact-checking, these principles are tested instantly. The modern reader does not passively consume; they interrogate, screenshot, archive, and rebut. The ultimate court is no longer only judicial. It is the court of public opinion, convened within seconds of publication. The people are good at it.
Media scholarship on commercialisation warns that market logics increasingly shape editorial judgment. Bunce, a media scholar, describes it as a “broken estate” pressured by metrics and virality, where outrage travels faster than nuance. Cushion, another scholar, argues that the work on journalistic legitimacy underscores how political attacks on the press, especially during the Trump years, eroded trust while simultaneously exposing weaknesses in newsroom accountability. When commercial interests trump verification, sensationalism becomes currency. In such an environment, accuracy is the fulcrum of media practice for a prolonged institutional survival. Otherwise, as seen in many countries, the death of mainstream media is imminent and sure.
Citizen journalism has emerged both as a corrective and a complication. Scholars such as Steensen and Westlund show how digital journalism studies recognise participatory media as expanding democratic voice, while Okeowo, for instance, contends for citizen media’s role in advancing accountability where mainstream media capture sounds real.
The Panama Papers investigation, analysed by Fernandez and Ricketson, demonstrated that collaborative networks, professional and civic, can expose offshore secrecy at a global scale. That model affirmed journalism’s watchdog function. However, the same digital affordances empower misinformation. Seib writes on information warfare, and he illustrates how disinformation ecosystems weaponize partial truths, deepfakes and selective editing. In an enlightened generation, truth surfaces quickly and in a flash.
The controversies surrounding coverage of Trump, including litigation against major broadcasters such as the BBC and disputes over edited statements, exemplify the fragility of narrative framing. Harrison and Hanna’s writings on the exposition of defamation and privacy law remind journalists that editorial duty carries legal consequences.
When words are “chopped,” or context inverted, liability may arise not only in court but in credibility. Goldstein reflects on journalism and truth and underscores that the bond between reporter and public rests on perceived fidelity to fact and never about ideological alignment. In polarised climates, even accurate reporting is filtered through suspicion. The lesson is rigorous.
The events surrounding January 6 intensified scrutiny of media performance. Tong, the scholar, analyses tensions between journalism and politicians; he reveals how press excesses can inflame polarisation. Allsop asks what journalism is for in such moments, that is, ‘to inform, not inflame and to contextualize and never to caricature.’ When coverage appears selective or hyperbolic, critics seize upon it as proof of bias. Conversely, when journalists play the game of malice with reckless abandon, the enlightened generation detects both.
Legal education is therefore no luxury for journalists of this era. In this digital era, where a tweet can trigger litigation and a headline can move markets, ignorance is professional negligence. Training must also address algorithmic amplification and the permanence of online archives. The enlightened audience remembers.
But legal compliance alone cannot restore trust. Transparency, publishing corrections prominently, explaining editorial choices, and disclosing conflicts are what signal professional humility. Media literacy and civic education must operate symbiotically; an informed citizenry and a responsible press reinforce each other. When journalists openly correct errors, they model accountability rather than concealing fallibility. In the era where “the truth comes out ahead of you,” speed must not outrun verification. Being first is less important than being right.
Practising journalism today demands a recalibration of priorities. Commercial sustainability is legitimate, however, not at the expense of accuracy. Section 3 of the Media Council Act offers a straightforward compass of fairness, accountability, dignity, professionalism, and national values.
The court of public opinion is unforgiving because it is participatory. Every reader is a potential fact-checker. Every subject is a potential litigant. The Panama Papers proved journalism’s power when disciplined by collaboration and evidence.
The conflicts involving Trump, the BBC, and January 6 coverage illustrate the cost of distortion. Between malice and timidity lies professionalism anchored in law. If journalism is to thrive in this generation, it must treat legal literacy as core training, transparency as reflex, and truth as non-negotiable. Only then can freedom of expression remain both robust and responsible. Hear ye or else.
Follow The Standard
channel
on WhatsApp
By Ndong Evance